HVK Archives: Lethal Weapons
Lethal Weapons - Far Eastern Economic Review
Ahmed Rashid
()
April 23, 1998
Title: Lethal Weapons
Author: Ahmed Rashid
Publication: Far Eastern Economic Review
Date: April 23, 1998
Enemies since birth, Pakistan and India have been squabbling for
more than 50 years. But though the hostility may manifest itself
in politics or territorial dispute, religion is its underlying
motif. Hardly surprising, then, that Pakistan should plump for
religious symbolism in choosing a name for its first medium-
range, surface-to-surface missile with the potential to carry a
nuclear warhead. The missile, tested on April 6, is called
Ghauri, after Shahabuddin Ghauri, an Afghan Muslim king.
Significantly, Ghauri defeated Prithviraj Chauhan, a 12th-century
Hindu ruler whose name evokes that of an Indian missile, the
Prithvi, which the Ghauri was built to counter.
The threat of re-enactment of medieval religious battles with hi-
tech weaponry has understandably aroused international alarm. A
missile race on the Subcontinent might lead to both rivals
cranking up their clandestine but well-documented nuclear weapons
programmes. Security concerns aside, Islamabad's display of
missile muscle has significant political ramifications for
itself, India, China and another big player in the region-the
United States. Most importantly, it has shown that Western
pressure, which had worked in the past to contain the missile
rivalry, no longer carries the same weight. Rather, domestic
political compulsions are now driving India and Pakistan in their
missile build-up.
Senior Pakistani officials say the Ghauri's successful launch-it
has twice been postponed-was intended as a warning to India's new
Hindu-nationalist government, which has vowed to reconsider the
option of deploying nuclear weapons. With a range of 1,500
kilometres and a payload of 700 kilograms, the Ghauri is
Pakistan's biggest and longest-range missile to date. It is the
fifth in the Hataf series of missiles, which until now has
included only rockets with a range of less than 800 kilometres.
India's Prithvi is a medium-range, surface-to-surface missile
that Pakistani authorities say can reach every Pakistani city
except northwestern Quetta. Both the Prithvi and the Ghauri can
be carried on mobile launchers. Once they were fired, the other
side would have just three minutes to react.
The Ghauri's debut provoked a predictably belligerent response
>from India, Immediately after the test, the hawkish Bharatiya
Janata Party government announced it would launch an indigenous
spy satellite to monitor future Pakistani missile tests and troop
movements. Under pressure to act decisively on this issue, the
BJP is likely also to add more Prithvis to those already deployed
at the India-Pakistan border since April 1997. That will only
fuel the fears in Islamabad. Says a senior Pakistani cabinet
official: "We faced a growing threat and we have been warning the
world about this for some time."
But Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif also had some
compelling domestic reasons to test the Ghauri. For a start, it
was the perfect way to claw back some of the popular goodwill
that he has lost by failing to deal effectively with a battered
economy, worsening law-and-order, and an increasingly pugnacious
opposition. The Ghauri was aimed specifically at silencing ex-
Premier Benazir Bhutto and Islamic fundamentalist parties, who in
recent weeks have lambasted Sharif's administration for, among
other things, opening the country's nuclear facilities to
American inspection.
For India's BJP government, the Ghauri test has called for some
deft footwork. The BJP has tried to satisfy hawkish elements
among party members and soothe popular fears of a stronger
Pakistan, while also promoting the pragmatic view that an arms
race would be costly and destabilizing. So far, truculence seems
to be ascendant. India's abrasive defence minister, George
Fernandes, has claimed that no part of Pakistan "is out of range
of Prithvi."
Fernandes has also drawn both Beijing and Washington into the war
of words by accusing China, another long-time rival, of helping
Pakistan to develop the Ghauri. And he has urged the U.S. to
investigate his claims. That is certain to attract the attention
of the anti-China lobby in the American Congress. Washington in
1993 slapped a short-lived arms embargo on Pakistan and China for
trading missile technology. A separate U.S. arms sanction on
Pakistan has been maintained since 1990 on suspicion that
Islamabad is developing nuclear weapons.
The flurry over the Ghauri led China to take the unprecedented
step of denying its involvement in not one but three statements
issued in early April. Zhu Bangzao, an official at China's
Foreign Ministry, said at a news conference: "As for whether
China helped Pakistan, I can say that there is no connection
whatsoever." This time, the Americans seem to believe the
Chinese. "Pakistan has sought missile-related assistance from a
number of suppliers and it should not be assumed in this case
that China was the supplier," Jim Foley, a spokesman for the U.S.
State Department, said on April 10. Privately, U.S. officials say
they believe North Korea supplied key missile technology to
Pakistan, a charge Islamabad denies.
The State Department is anxious not to feed Pakistan-India
paranoia ahead of a South Asia visit planned by President Bill
Clinton later this year, nor to complicate bilateral relations
with China before the American president's trip, to Beijing,
expected in late June. In a bid to play down the Ghauri test,
Washington expressed mild "regret" at the test and urged Pakistan
and India to exercise restraint.
Whether the two rivals will listen is another matter-the U.S. has
less and less clout in the region as governments bow more and
more to political compulsions at home. Nonetheless, it is in
Washington's own interest to prevent any escalation of tensions
on the Subcontinent. That will be the brief for Bill Richardson,
U.S. ambassador to the United Nations during his visit to New
Delhi and Islamabad starting April 14. The Americans are
desperate to develop a new relationship with India, China and
Iran, and don't want a South Asian arms race to scuttle Clinton's
highprofile diplomatic manoeuvres in the region. The U.S. is
keen, too, for India and Pakistan to restart talks stalled since
last year.
Washington fears that the two countries extensive missile
programmes are being coupled with research in the miniaturization
of nuclear warheads, which could give nuclear capability to their
conventional surface-to-surface missiles. Pakistan is considered
to be ahead of India in acquiring this technology, while India
leads in the capability to deliver nuclear warheads by aircraft.
Defence observers believe both sides already have the technology
to develop nuclear weapons, and the race now is about achieving
the best way to deliver them. "The missile rivalry is really all
about perfecting delivery systems for nuclear weapons," says an
Islamabad-based Western ambassador. "The real danger is that this
rivalry is just one step away from either country announcing
nuclear -weapons capability."
India also has other military cards up its sleeve, such as long-
range missiles that could threaten China. India is capable of
conducting tests, but has kept them on hold so far. A launch
could lead to a Pakistani countermove and even a sharp Chinese
reaction that would make the Subcontinental missile race a
larger problem. The fact that neither India nor Pakistan has
signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty or the Comprehensive
Test Ban Treaty only adds to the sense of regional insecurity.
Back
Top
|
